Whitaker's Current Articles

If You Say Anybody Ever Suffered But Jews, You are Anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews

Gibson got so sick of being attacked as an anti-Semite for his new movie about Christ's crucifixion that HE ACTUALLY POINTED OUT THAT JEWS WERE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE IN HISTORY WHO EVER SUFFERED!

One thing Gibson pointed out was that, before Hitler took power in Germany, Stalin starved twenty million Ukrainians kulaks to death. Stalin stated that his aim was to destroy the kulak class. Kulaks were the more successful peasants in Russia.

Alan Colmes ( the liberal on Fox's Hannity and Colmes) was talking to Billy Graham's son about this.

Colmes said it was pure anti-Semitism to compare the "accidental" famine under Stalin to the murder of Jews by Hitler!

Billy Graham's boy, since he is a good pet conservative for liberals, more or less agreed.

For the American left, saying Stalin’s starving the kulaks to death was an accident is an improvement. They used to say it didn’t happen at all. Liberal Intellectuals who went to Russia in the 1930s said flatly, "I saw no starving peasants."

Colmes admits they starved, but he says Comrade Stalin had nothing to do with it.

No, I am not talking about Kent State. Kent State is the incident of troops firing on campus that the media are still screaming about. The Kent State incident was the last big campus riot against the Vietnam War. It happened in 1972.

At Kent State University students were shot by National Guard troops when the students were throwing rocks at terrified young National Guardsmen.

The media used to deny the students were throwing rocks. They admit it now, but they still call the troops a bunch of fascists.

I am talking about troops killing people on campus, but I am not talking about Kent State.

Now that many cities are openly defying Federal immigration law and protecting illegal immigrants openly, I am reminded of another campus shooting.

In 1962 the State of Mississippi openly defied Federal law and refused to integrate the University of Mississippi. The president at that time was Saint John of Kennedy. Saint john of Kennedy sent the 101st Airborne Division to occupy the University of Mississippi. In the process, those Federal troops shot three people down in cold blood on the University of Mississippi campus. Those people were not throwing rocks at them.

All the media agree that Howard Dean really lost it when he did all that shrieking right after the New Hampshire primary.

But weeks before that primary, National Review had a cover that showed Dean red-faced and shrieking in exactly the same way in an earlier speech. That was when Dean led in the polls.

To most of us, all liberals tend to look alike. But to liberals who are fighting for power, the differences are crucial.

Bill Clinton took over the Democratic Party from the moderate side. His Democratic Study Committee wanted a less fanatical leftism, a bigger appeal to the South and West than to the Northeast liberals.

Howard Dean wanted the Democrats to become complete leftists again. I don't want to bore you to death with internal Democratic politics, but the fact is that Dean was taking the Party away from the Clintons.

The Clintons want the Democratic Party to lose in 2004 so Hillary can get the nomination in 2008. But at the same time they do not want someone nominated in 2004 who will take the Party away from them.

Howard Dean had a lot of weaknesses, but nobody seemed to notice them as he forged ahead as the leftist candidate. Then suddenly they were noticed and Dean was out.

William Jefferson Clinton is a political genius. If I had his access to the press, I could have destroyed Dean and left no traces of it. And I am nowhere near Clinton's genius in practical politics.

What the Democrats now have is exactly what the Clintons would want. They are once again nominating a Massachusetts liberal for president. The Democrats have not won with anybody but a Southerner since 1960.

And if you believe that was just luck, I have about a dozen bridges I want to sell you.

Wouldn't you love to be a general who discovered that your opposite number, the enemy general, only shot at your flag?

In other words, wherever you put your flag up, that is the only place the enemy directs his bombers, his artillery, and his ground assaults?

You could store your munitions in one place, have your air bases in another, mobilize your ground forces in another place, and put your flag miles away from all of them.

That is how the battle between the left and right is waged today. Conservatives send frantic newsletters to each other about how Clinton lies, about how Bush lies, about how the latest liberal demands are insane. They fire frantically at whatever the liberals put up.

Meanwhile, the liberal base is ignored. Their base is the universities. We give them our children and we give them our money to recruit and mobilize with on every campus. Every now and then somebody complains about how biased the universities are, but nobody fires directly at them.

"Why Johnny Can't Think" is a call for a total assault on the enemy BASE. It is not just a criticism, it is a call for revolution. It discredits all the present social sciences and calls for academia to be "defrocked and defunded."

"Why Johnny Can't Think" says that the cry of "academic freedom" is used by today's leftist professors in exactly thee same way monopolists used "free enterprise" in 1900 to defend their right to fix prices.

Not only must "social scientists" be fired, the universities must make reparations for their crimes.

On the other hand, how would you like to be in the army where your general only fired at the flag?